Federal NDP leader Thomas Mulcair (L) and B.C. NDP opposition leader Adrian Dix, united in July in opposition to closure of the Kitsilano Coast Guard station, are differing now about Mulcair’s proposed changes to the Clarity Act, which Dix says reduces other provinces’ roles in any effort by Quebc to leave Canada.

Photograph by: Ward Perrin
, Vancouver Sun

VICTORIA — B.C. New Democratic Party leader Adrian Dix opposes key aspects of the proposal by his national leader, Tom Mulcair, to rewrite the federal legislation regarding Quebec separation.

“Some of what Tom is doing is good,” Dix told me Thursday, “But I have a different view.”

The provincial NDP leader was reacting to a private member’s bill drafted by Mulcair and tabled in Parliament this week by the federal party.

The proposed legislation would replace and to some extent weaken the provisions of the Clarity Act, enacted by the federal Liberals in 2000 to establish tougher ground rules for any future Quebec referendum on separation.

Dix expressed sympathy for his federal leader’s venture into the controversial territory of the national unity file — “I’m very respectful of Tom.”

But in the course of a telephone interview, backstopped by written references supplied by the provincial leader’s office, Dix identified substantive problems with the Mulcair-authored “Act Respecting Democratic Change.”

First and foremost was the federal leader’s proposal to recognize a bare minimum threshold for success in any future “yes” vote on Quebec separation.

Providing the question were clear and there were no irregularities in the referendum, the Mulcair proposal would oblige Ottawa to enter into negotiations on Quebec separation if “the majority of valid votes are cast in favour of the proposed change.”

Thus a bare majority would be enough to set the wheels in motion to break up the country.

“I disagree with that,” Dix told me. He expects many British Columbians would also dispute that “50 per cent plus one would be enough” to automatically trigger negotiations on separation.

The provincial NDP leader repeated what he said earlier to my colleague Peter O’Neil of The Vancouver Sun: he favours the wording of the Clarity Act, with its reference to the need for a “clear majority” and the implication of a higher threshold, perhaps in the 55-per-cent range.

Dix also broke with his national leader on the role assigned to provincial governments in any acting out of another referendum on separation. Or, rather, as Dix characterizes it, the diminished role for the provinces in the Mulcair bill.

The existing Clarity Act specifies three opportunities for provincial governments to influence the course of events.

First, in deciding whether the referendum question is sufficiently clear to provide a mandate for separation, “the House of Commons shall take into account ... any formal statements or resolutions by the government or legislative assembly of any province.”

Likewise, “in considering whether there has been a clear expression of will by a clear majority ... the House of Commons shall take into account any formal statements or resolutions by the government or legislative assembly of any province.”

Presuming the referendum passed both of those tests — clear question, clear expression of will by a clear majority — the Clarity Act acknowledges a pivotal role for provinces in the subsequent negotiation:

“An amendment to the Constitution of Canada would be required for any province to secede from Canada, which in turn would require negotiations involving at least the governments of all the provinces and the government of Canada.”

The Mulcair legislation drops any reference to provinces having a say in judging the clarity of the question or the decisiveness of the vote.

It does acknowledge, albeit grudgingly, that if the Constitution has to be amended to allow separation, the provinces could not be excluded from the process: “This Act does not limit the government of Canada’s authority to negotiate any constitutional amendment with the other participants in Confederation.”

Thus, in Dix’s comparative reading, Mulcair’s rewrite of the Clarity Act would eliminate any provincial role in the process, prior to the separation question being defined and decided. It is also less prescriptive as to the provincial role in any subsequent negotiation, seeming to give the federal government more flexibility in how it proceeds.

Mulcair envisions a process that would in large measure play out bilaterally between two parties, the Canadian nation and the Quebec nation.

Dix sees the country as a confederation of provinces and territories, each with a role in deciding on what grounds one of their number can depart legally and constitutionally. He also sees the need, as a would-be future premier of B.C., to preserve provincial prerogatives against any federal encroachment.

His comments highlighted a telling contrast to what Mulcair himself suggested in an interview this week.

“I’m not concerned about anybody in the NDP,” declared Mulcair, when my Ottawa-based colleague O’Neil asked if he and Dix were at odds on the matter. “All I can tell you is this: I’ve spoken with all of my provincial colleagues and they were all very much aware of what we’re putting on the table.”

Story Tools

Federal NDP leader Thomas Mulcair (L) and B.C. NDP opposition leader Adrian Dix, united in July in opposition to closure of the Kitsilano Coast Guard station, are differing now about Mulcair’s proposed changes to the Clarity Act, which Dix says reduces other provinces’ roles in any effort by Quebc to leave Canada.

We encourage all readers to share their views on our articles and blog posts. We are committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion, so we ask you to avoid personal attacks, and please keep your comments relevant and respectful. If you encounter a comment that is abusive, click the "X" in the upper right corner of the comment box to report spam or abuse. We are using Facebook commenting. Visit our FAQ page for more information.

Almost Done!

Postmedia wants to improve your reading experience as well as share the best deals and promotions from our advertisers with you. The information below will be used to optimize the content and make ads across the network more relevant to you. You can always change the information you share with us by editing your profile.

By clicking "Create Account", I hearby grant permission to Postmedia to use my account information to create my account.

I also accept and agree to be bound by Postmedia's Terms and Conditions with respect to my use of the Site and I have read and understand Postmedia's Privacy Statement. I consent to the collection, use, maintenance, and disclosure of my information in accordance with the Postmedia's Privacy Policy.

Postmedia wants to improve your reading experience as well as share the best deals and promotions from our advertisers with you. The information below will be used to optimize the content and make ads across the network more relevant to you. You can always change the information you share with us by editing your profile.

By clicking "Create Account", I hearby grant permission to Postmedia to use my account information to create my account.

I also accept and agree to be bound by Postmedia's Terms and Conditions with respect to my use of the Site and I have read and understand Postmedia's Privacy Statement. I consent to the collection, use, maintenance, and disclosure of my information in accordance with the Postmedia's Privacy Policy.